NJ Residents for Action to Meet With Congressman Lance Monday

Group hopes Lance will agree to a Town Hall-style meeting in Westfield.

Westfield resident and single mom of two Karen Egert was so shaken and saddened by the mass shooting in Newtown, CT, that she felt compelled to act.

The singer and musician started a grassroots effort that began with a candlelight vigil in Mindowaskin Park the day after the elementary school massacre. Today, Egert is the president of NJ Residents for Action, a statewide community-based group started by Westfield residents working toward meaningful legislation, which includes a federal ban on assault weapons and magazine clips, universal background checks, and stronger punishments for illegal gun purchases.

Egert said she knows she's not alone in her desire to see stricter gun laws in place. Citing a recent Fairleigh Dickinson University poll that found that 75 percent of registered voters in New Jersey favored greater restrictions on guns and ammunition, Egert said it is time for local lawmakers to hear the voices of their constituents.

NJ Residents for Action will meet with Congressman Leonard Lance (R-7th District) at 10 a.m. Monday, Feb. 4. Egert said she and other members of the group are very pleased that he's agreed to meet with them but are concerned that, in the past, Lance has had a record of voting against "any common sense gun legislation that has come to his desk." 

"We're giving him every opportunity to meet with us and we're very happy that he wants to engage with us and set up a town hall meeting," said Egert, who added that the Westfield Board of Education has already agreed to allow the group and Lance to use one of its school buildings for the meeting. 

"The New Jersey state legislature has been working very actively in trying to keep our state safe and we have an assault weapons ban here in New Jersey but our Congressman has spoken out publicly and said he is against a federal assault weapons ban," Egert said. "More frighteningly he voted for House Bill HR-822. What it does is it invalidates New Jersey's laws and it allows gun owners with permits from other states who are not allowed to conceal and carry in our state and it trumps our state's rule. At this point, he is reckless in endangering our state's residents and also he is invalidating our state legislature. I believe he is endangering the residents' safety for politics."

Egert said while Lance, who has received an A- rating from the National Rifle Association, has consistently been campaigning as a moderate she believes his voting record, particularly on this issue, is anything but. 

"I would argue that most of the residents have not been aware of this," she said. "Since the Sandy Hook incident people are becoming very aware of this issue and this is what is frightening to the residents." 

Egert said she looks forward to discussing the parameters of a public town hall-style meeting with Lance and setting a date so she can inform other concerned residents. The group is also eager to find out where Lance stands on President Barack Obama's recent gun control proposals, which according to The Huffington Post, mark the biggest legislative effort in a generation.

In an email to Patch sent Feb. 1, Lance wrote “I have called for a comprehensive study of our laws aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, potentially including closing gun-show loopholes, tightening the background-check process on gun sales and examining our current entertainment culture where Hollywood and video game makers tend to de-sensitize gun violence. 

“The President's recommendations deserve a full and thorough examination by the relevant congressional committees in both the House and Senate and I believe that process is underway.

“I am pleased that the House Energy and Commerce Committee — of which I am a member – will take a lead role in examining the current state of federal mental health research programs and what role mental illness played in the tragedies in Newtown, Aurora, Tucson and at Virginia Tech.”

NJ Residents Seek Westfield Mayor's Support

On Tuesday, Egert and fellow NJ Residents for Action members spoke before the Westfield Town Council (see attached video) to ask Mayor Andy Skibitsky to join Mayors Against Illegal Guns, an initiative co-founded by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Egert and others said they were disappointed that Skibitsky was absent from the meeting Tuesday and even more frustrated that as of Friday night the mayor had not returned their numerous calls to his home and office. On Thursday, Egert went to Skibitsky's office in person to drop off the organization's literature in case he had not received it.  

"Really, this isn't rocket science," Egert said. "I handed them the mission statement. He (Skibitsky) has the statement. He knows what the organization stands for. All the surrounding towns have joined on. There's absolutely no logical reason why he can't join an organization which is really aimed at lowering violence in our community."

Egert said she'd heard from other residents who have attended prior council meetings that the mayor is often absent and finds this "unacceptable."

"We're just asking for a response," Egert said. "He's not doing his job when he's not attending meetings, he's not answering his phone and not returning phone calls and not just from me but from other members of my group. If he doesn't want the job, step aside, because we need a mayor who isn't absent from town meetings and one who will answer his phone. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would be honored to represent the people of Westfield. If he's too busy, step aside." 

Patch contacted Skibitsky's office Friday morning via phone and email to ask if he intended to join the Mayors Against Illegal Guns initiative. As of Friday evening, neither was returned. 

Rights vs. Reason

While some argue that the Second Amendment secures their right to bear arms, nothing the group is advocating for violates the Second Amendment, said Egert, who has vowed to ignore her detractors and focus on getting her message to the masses. The activist said while her effort has gained momentum statewide, her pledge to try to bring about some change began at home. 

Egert said she has told her son, a junior at Westfield High School, "I'm going to do whatever I can for you and for your safety. I don't know what I can do, but I'm not going to stop until we do something. Because this is unacceptable. I can't bear the thought of children being at risk of army artillery."

NJ Residents for Action will hold its next meeting at The First Congregational Church in Westfield on Elmer Street at 7:30 p.m. Wednesday, Feb 6. All are welcome to attend.

karen egert February 07, 2013 at 04:00 AM
To all those who have a reasonable mind and are speaking reasonably, I have seen ALL OF THESE SAME SCREENAMES OVER AND OVER ON EVERY BLOG , ARTICLE ETC. -- Aman77, Brad Scaeffer, -- etc . dont waste your time with their hateful comments. They follow me around like the plague. Why? Because they are intimidated. They speak nonsense -- and they go on the same blogs--over and over again . They seem to have nothing else better or constructive to do than to reiterate the same ridiculous NONSENSE-- . Whatever you call it assault rifles, semi-assualt rifles ... together with magazine clips they KILL VERY QUICKLY AND WITH DEADLY ACCRURACY....... Brad-- do you have children??? I have asked you this before . You never answered. Your silence is deafening. If you DID , you might think how it would be to have a 6 year old blasted SIX OR SEVEN TIMES WITH THE KIND OF AMMUNITION THEY USE IN AFGHANISITAN!!!! THE bullet shatters upon impact and that is done over and over and over ... What is wrong with you ???? Are you like the tin man that doesn't have a heart? Or the lion who doesn't have courage? Or the Scarecrow who doesn;t have a BRAIN?? All of you who in the face of 20 babies who got murdered are using this post as a way to spout HATE should be ashamed . Ashamed. Something tells me Jesus wasn't packing heat-- or Abraham .
karen egert February 07, 2013 at 04:06 AM
And as far as mental illness --if they didn't have access to a military assault rifles and high capacity ammunition clips --THEY COULD NOT CARRY OUT WHAT MAY BE LURKING IN THEIR SAD AND TWISTED MINDS!!! This is not rocket science. It's disgraceful that politicians USE anything to justify their unjustifiable positions. It is a disgrace on this country that COMMON SENSE is overshadowed by thinking such as from bullies like Brad and Aman77 Don't the two of you have anything CONSTRUCTIVE to do in your life? .
Brad Schaeffer February 07, 2013 at 01:15 PM
Karen. Not gonna waste any more time on this. Can't speak for this Aman but it apparently your definition of "hate speech" (at least coming from me--one who actually favors some restrictions on guns) is asking questions to which you have no answers; that would require actually thinking through any piece of legislation you demand. But law-making is, in fact, about pesky details and that requires getting the facts straight before moving forwards as it effects people's lives as well has broader implications for civil liberties...of which the right to bear arms is, I hate to tell you, one of them. So I prefer to tread slowly and meticulously before moving forward with yet more laws whose actual impact upon the problem is doubtful based on data (ugly word I know). As to my silence being "deafening" aren't you the one who commented on the actual article I wrote in Patch (as part of my strategy if silence I suppose) being too LONG? So which is it Karen? Am I talking too much or too little? Finally, as to the children question...I mention I have children twice in the article that you surely must have read because you felt compelled to comment on it...you didn't really read it all did you? Amyway. If you'd ever like to debate that matter I will happily. But I must warn you that facts and data may actually rear their ugly heads. Regardless, please know that with enemies like you leading the opposition, I assure you the NRA needs no friends. Good luck to you.
Franco February 07, 2013 at 06:13 PM
Ms. Egert. Please know that I respect your opinion and can see that you were deeply effected by the Newtown massacre. You are acting in the only way you know how and you are certainly within your rights to do so. But I have noticed that, as Mr. Schaeffer alludes to above, to an outside observer like myself your rather emotional tirades (really the only word I can think of) and your lashing out at even the mildest of serious critique--which anyone who takes on an issue so divisive must be prepared for--is losing your cause credibility, not the other way around. I do not own guns. I am even not from this country though have lived here many years. But one aspect of America I love which is unique is you have an actual Bill Of Rights that codifies civil liberties and protects them against assault. I do not like guns, I see no reason for me to own one, but I do understand where many in this country come from and respect them. In the interest of fairness, after reading your post that caught my eye I reviewed the posters whom you name as being "hateful". Mr. Schaeffer's questions to you and his own indepth article which, if I may, seems to be much more researched and dipassionate than yours, are models of respect, introspection, and show a sincere desire to understand the issue in all its complexity. If you see vitriol in Mr. Schaeffer's article and legitimate questions to you (that you I must say have never answered) then perhaps your movement needs a different voice?
Devilsfan February 08, 2013 at 04:33 PM
I'm still waiting for you to speak out about banning abortion doctors? Wouldn't banning abortion doctors, except those doctors needed to perform abortions for medical reasons and rape victims, be COMMON SENSE? Or are you just the typical left wing Hypocrite??
S_O_G February 09, 2013 at 11:16 PM
How do they expect their group to earn any respect when the leader of the group makes the comments she does on this site? If this is a serious group, they should consider a new leader.
Eric Gillette February 11, 2013 at 11:27 PM
Hi Karen, I want to start off by saying my name is Eric Gillette, and I am very public on the internet and participate in the gun debate frequently where possible. I prefaced in this manner to make it clear I'm not a troll, and am not here to "call you out" or anything of the sort. I am merely here to maybe give you some perspective you may not otherwise hear from anyone or anywhere else (my assumption, please forgive me if this is incorrect after you witness what I have to say). I applaud you in your passionate effort to try and reduce gun violence around the country first of all, however, I feel as others have pointed out here, that your efforts are misguided or at least misinformed. I have school-age children (12 year old son and a 9 year old daughter) who both attend public school here in Florida where I now live. I was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York and then my parents moved to New Jersey when I was in my teens (around 15 years old). I joined the United States Marine Corps right out of high school, and after finishing with the Marine Corps, I then started working for a company called New York Life Insurance Company on 320 Lexington Avenue in New York City and moved to back to Brooklyn from my parents house in New Jersey. (continued. . .)
Eric Gillette February 11, 2013 at 11:36 PM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) During this time, I rode around the city on the public transportation system to meet with my clients, and traveled very late into the evening many nights, and I felt very unsafe in doing so, as did my then girlfriend at the time (who later became my wife). In checking into the law for New York, I later found that it was almost impossible for me to obtain a concealed carry permit in that state, despite being a law-abiding citizen living in a city with one of the highest crime rates in the country -- this (and the weather, as I got tired of shoveling snow constantly) is what prompted my move to the state of Florida after later starting the business I have now owned since 2002. After moving to Florida, I obtained a concealed weapon permit, and also bought and own several guns, despite never owning guns or coming from a family who owned guns (my parents are both democratic/liberal in their political views, and don't have any guns in their home). I have taken my children to the gun range with me to shoot, and have also demonstrated gun safety with them, and have informed them of and role played with them about what they should do in the event that violence breaks out and their dad (me) is forced to use his firearm to defend my safety, their safety, or the safety of others. (continued. . .)
Eric Gillette February 11, 2013 at 11:44 PM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) While most in my family have believed this to be a bit of a "radical" approach, I firmly believe that educating my children on firearms, and firearm safety is the best pro-active way that I can prepare them for scenarios they may not expect. In fact, after the Newtown tragedy, I sat my children down and explained to them what happened in Newtown, and explained to them ways that they could try to avoid becoming casualties of a similar incident should that take place in their own school. Now Karen, I mention all these things to give you some background on me, and help you understand my school of thought, so that you know for sure that I am not here to attack you -- I just want you to understand things from the perspective of the unique position I have as both a father and a gun owner. (continued. . .)
Eric Gillette February 11, 2013 at 11:49 PM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) My son, who is my eldest child, asked me after seeing Wayne LaPierre on TV saying we should have armed security guards in schools around the country, asked me, and I quote: "Dad, how come something bad has to happen in a school for them to put guards in our school?? Why don't they have guards before something bad happens??" As I'm sure you can imagine Karen, I didn't have a good answer for him, and told him: "Well, there are a lot of politics involved, and some people think it's necessary, while others don't." His words to me were: "Yeah, but while they figure it out, why don't they put the guards in all the schools for now so that more kids don't get killed." This. . .from a 12 year old boy who is neither politically charged, and has not a dog in the fight concerning gun control -- but just his pure and simple common sense, while our legislators "debate" the issue and focus on things other than the real issues. While I certainly agree with you that we (the people and the government) need to do things in order to help curb the scourge that is gun violence in our country, I don't think it's prudent to go after what some would deem as the "low hanging fruit" in the gun debate -- "Assault Rifles" for example. (continued. . .)
Eric Gillette February 11, 2013 at 11:57 PM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) I own an AR-15, Glock 30 (which I carry daily), Smith & Wesson Governor, as well as a Ruger LC9 (which my lady carries daily with her). I point this out because it seems the easiest target would be semi-automatic rifles for gun control advocates, and you pointed out how the shooter at Sandy Hook shot through the glass in the school doors before entering using his assault rifle. Well, besides breaking every gun law that is on the books (he stole the guns, murdered his mother, and entered a gun-free school zone), I have to say Karen, if he hadn't used an assault rifle, and instead used a handgun instead, the effects wouldn't have been any less devastating. Shooting the glass with a rifle or a handgun would have had the same effect since .223 rifles and an average .357 handgun or .45 ACP handgun would have had the same effect on the glass, since they travel at roughly the same velocity. In fact, a .357 or .45 round are much larger than .223 rounds (the kind of rounds that an AR-15 fires), so the damage to the glass would have been immediate, and might have taken even less shots. I certainly understand that you may not know a lot about guns and may never have fired one in your life, and I don't expect you to know a lot about guns or to ever shoot one if you don't feel like doing so. (continued. . .)
Eric Gillette February 12, 2013 at 12:03 AM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) But Karen, the reason I mention these things, is because I really prefer to help you understand the truth, rather than debating facts, statistics, and other things with you. I'd rather reach you as one parent to another parent, so that maybe we can discuss some good ways to accomplish something we both want for our children and the children of America in general -- less gun violence, while not making the lives of law-abiding gun owners more difficult. Politicians are only concerned about politics, and likewise will be oblivious to anything that would hurt them politically, even if it appears to be what the people want (take your Mayor that you've pointed out here who refuses to return your calls, which I agree demonstrates his lack of respect for his constituents), but people like you and I and the others who have commented here are where the rubber meets the road. I believe if people like us can come to agreement over what makes sense, than we can set the example for our politicians. That said, Karen, targeting AR-15's is not the solution to what amounts to a very large problem. . .AR-15's are NOT automatic weapons, and aren't any more dangerous than a Glock 30 for example -- in fact the only folks who have automatic or "burstable" (3 round burst) AR-15's are State and Local Police and the Military. (continued. . .)
Eric Gillette February 12, 2013 at 12:09 AM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) An AR-15 can fire as many rounds as a Glock 30 or any other handgun can fire (depends on the shooter and his/her level of experience with said firearm) -- it is no more difficult to "fire a lot of round very fast" as someone else put it, from an AR-15, a Glock 30, or any other handgun or semi-automatic rifle. Now that term, semi-automatic, means a firearm, that will fire one round, each time the trigger is pulled. . .this includes AR-15's, and Glocks, most revolvers, and some 1911's which have a single action trigger. Karen, I'm pointing these things out to you in order to help you understand -- it is not my goal to patronize you, or to make you feel like I'm attacking you, again I'm here simply to point out the facts, devoid of the emotion and passion that usually surfaces in these types of discussions. But that's what this is. . .a discussion, and not a debate, because I only wish to help you understand, since I understand (I think) what your goals are, and what drives you to pursue them. Something I'd like to point out to you is that banning specific types of firearms, will not reduce gun crime -- the way to reduce gun crime is to improve education, since statistically, societies with higher levels of education typically have less crime. (continued. . .)
Eric Gillette February 12, 2013 at 12:14 AM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) That said, I think what we need is a more though-out solutions to gun violence, and the mental infirmity or depression that causes them, instead of knee-jerk laws that help no one, yet affect everyone. Women tend to be more emotional about things than men do, which isn't a sign of weakness as some folks have mentioned on here and attack you about, however, I believe that you're very intelligent, and that you are really here wanting to fight the good fight, which is why I have taken the time to write this response to you. That said, I think what we need are more though-out solutions to gun violence, and the mental infirmity, depression, or other issues that causes otherwise ordinary people to commit horrific crimes with guns. This, instead of knee-jerk laws that help no one, yet affect everyone. In the early 1920's there was a law passed that prohibited the consumption of alcohol by citizens (not politicians, since politicians usually exempt themselves from the laws that they expect us to obey and follow -- so they never really feel the effects of what is it they force on the rest of us). This "ban" if you will, simply created an underground market, where criminals became the suppliers of alcohol, and in doing so, created the one of the bloodiest periods in American history as they sought to wrest control from one another over the black market that our government helped to create. (continued. . .)
Devilsfan February 12, 2013 at 12:20 AM
And you position on abortion is???? We are all waiting to see if you're a hypocrite!!!
Eric Gillette February 12, 2013 at 12:26 AM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) Banning specific kinds, or firearms in general will simply create a black market for those types of firearms (or all firearms in the latter scenario), which will have the opposite effect of what it is you're trying to accomplish (since criminals will still have access to the firearms you're trying to stop, like AR-15's and so forth -- only law-abiding citizens will no longer have access to them, punishing the law-abiding for the acts of the lawless). The problem with gun control laws, and firearm limitation concepts is that they are supposed to prevent criminals from committing heinous acts with firearms, which would work remarkably well, if criminals actually obeyed the law. However, since criminals DO NOT obey the law (hence the term criminals), these laws don't do anything to deter them from obtaining firearms. I agree with you that most of the firearms obtained from outside of New Jersey come from neighboring states, however, let's also point out that one of those neighboring states is New York, which has an estimated 1,000,000 or more illegal guns in their criminal black market circulation. We can decide to discuss only where the guns originate from the beginning (i.e. my state of Florida, Pennslyvania, Virginia, etc) or we can also acknowledge the fact that there is a black market circulation as well, something politicans refuse to acknowledge. (continued. . .)
Devilsfan February 12, 2013 at 12:27 AM
Eric you could have wrote another 10 pages and it wouldn't matter. Karen is a left wing woman who marches to Obama's drum and only cares about advancing the left's agenda without trying to actually solve the violence problem in our country. She says she want's to protect children, but has yet to state her stance on abortion which has killed tens of millions of children since 1973.
Eric Gillette February 12, 2013 at 12:32 AM
(continued Eric Gillette. . .) So while it most certainly makes sense to try and close the gunshow loophole (I agree with you on this, however, I'd like to see it done in a way that doesn't make it difficult, or impossible for smaller sellers to compete with the larger gun stores and shops), I think it is also prudent to execute the punishments that our existing gun laws have put on the legislative table. At the same time, what we don't want to do is to make the lives of every day law-abiding gun owners more difficult, as this will only serve to divide our cities, states and country by people who believe gun ownership is a fundamental American right, and those who believe the 2nd Amendment is open to interpretation. For a long time, like you, I believe the latter, until I considered the consequences. I thought: "If we open the 2nd Amendment up to 'interpretation', what would happen to the other amendments?? Could our legislators also decide to open those up to 'interpretation' as well when they deem something to be inconvenient for them politically??" In this life, Karen, through our pursuits, and impassioned ideals and goals, we have to be careful what we wish for. I write this to you humbly, and seeking to start a real dialog on the gun control issue, rather than attacking you, or having you attack me. Is this something you'd be willing to openly discuss on this public forum?? Sincerely, Eric Gillette
Aman77 February 12, 2013 at 12:59 AM
Mr. Gillette, A very polite and well versed opinion that should make anyone think about gun control and the real world impacts of it on law-abiding citizens. You only make one mistake: You honestly think Karen Egert is going to read anything that even has a whiff of logic to it? I guarantee you she will never read this or if she does she'll have her hands over her ears and scream "I'm not listening!" You see Mr. Gillette. For people like Karen who have never shot a gun in her life and would no a bullet from a bull shot this who anti-gun control thing isn't about actually effecting positive change. It's about her filling a void in her life. It's about her desperately trying to be relevant. It's about her showing how much more morally superior she is to anyone because only people who agree with her really care about their kids. No neanderthal "gun crazies" like you. Don't you see? This is all about Karen to Karen. This is all about "look at me! Look how good and decent I am. Yay me!" Facts? Data? History? Psychology? Common Sense? What do they matter to people like her when she's found her pet issue, her cause, and now has something to sustain her? You made a valiant effort. But you may as well have written to the palm tree outside. For lefty loons "gun control" isn't about guns at all...it's about CONTROL.
Eric Gillette February 12, 2013 at 01:02 AM
Maybe that's true. . .maybe it's not. . .but I do know one thing for sure to be true: We will *never* be able to agree on anything if all we do is attack each other, and point out each other's flaws or incorrect spelling, etiquette, etc. Karen is trying to solve the gun violence problem the best way she knows how, which no one can actually knock her for. . .sure she is passionate about it, just as we are passionate about being gun owners. All we can do in the end, is try to explain things to her in a logical way, without allowing emotion or passion to over-ride and cause loss of composure, which just leads to screaming/shouting at each other -- or in the case of an internet forum like this, attacking each other verbally. You made some very good points, and I in kind agree with most of them, however, I think it's important to not put down what Karen is trying to do -- some of the biggest successes in history have come when people who have different belief systems come together to decide on what would be a "win-win" situation for both parties. ;-) This isn't a "black and white" thing. . .there's a lot of gray area, and I'm sure Karen will respond much better to someone who is explaining things in a nice way, and not attempting to attack her beliefs, know what I mean? Calling her out on abortion doesn't make much sense, given the topic of this discussion. And I say this to you in the kindest way possible, as I'm not trying to "call you out" or anything. ;-)
Devilsfan February 12, 2013 at 01:13 AM
Eric: First I haven't put her down. She's left of center that's not a put down. The abortion issue makes plenty of sense. If she is on a crusade to save children then she should be trying to save them all. The problem is there is no more black and white any more and all this grey is the problem.
Devilsfan February 12, 2013 at 01:29 AM
Aman, I agree and have been saying the same thing and that's why she won't provide her stance on abortion. Start saving all lives Karen!
ML February 12, 2013 at 02:06 AM
lol @ this NRA "call to action". You guys blew a gasket tonight. Very entertaining. Hey, which of you guys were the ones heckling the parents of dead children at Newtown? I know it was at least one of you.
Eric Gillette February 12, 2013 at 02:42 AM
I see your point in your comment below. . .you're definitely right about issues being all gray. I think that is very accurate in terms of how our society tends to try and pass "black and white" laws while not acknowledging the existence of the gray area you mentioned. ;-)
Devilsfan February 12, 2013 at 02:46 AM
No one was heckled. Listen to full recording. Then come back a make a post that is based on facts!
Eric Gillette February 12, 2013 at 02:47 AM
Aman, I understand your point. Maybe it's just my personality. I always try to reach "across the partisan aisle" as our politicians put it so try and connect with people on a more fundamental level, rather than debating the issue directly, if that makes sense. In my life and in my experience, I've always covered more ground in this fashion, and have actually been able to experience "win-win" scenarios as a result, so despite the fact that Karen may never reply, and may not listen. . .I owe it to her as one of my fellow American citizens to at least try. :-) If it does fall on deaf ears as you say, then I've only lost about 30 minutes of my time -- and even that's debatable, since others may come across this, others who may be of the same mindset as Karen appears to be, and who may change their minds, or start to seeing things a little bit different when they see a well-placed explanation of things, such as mine. :-) That's the worst, and best I could hope for as I'm sure you would agree. ;-)
Aman77 February 12, 2013 at 01:21 PM
You're a bright guy. You must be the last person on earth who didn't get the heads up that the video of the Newtown parent being "heckled" was doctored and spliced. He asked a question of the people in the gallery not once or twice but three times "can anyone give me a reason why these weapons should not be illegal" (or something like that). When it was clear he was actually seeking a response, that it wasn't rhetorical (he even looked around waiting for a reply) someone finally shouted out "the second amendment". The liberal media then spliced it to make it sound like he was being shouted over. Even CNN and MSNBC backed off on the "heckling" angle. I guess your news sources are a little slow? By the way in case you haven't heard, since your info seems to come from carrier pigeons, we landed on the moon.
ralphwiggummm February 21, 2013 at 05:07 AM
I can't help but think it is hilarious that Ms. Egert has lost her nerve to parent because of a school shooting. I guess she has too much time on her hands and/or is in need of anti-depressants. If this kind of thing unnerves her, she is going to have a quite a bumpy ride for the much of the rest of her life. And we will have to put up with her "movements" whenever some unsavory event occurs that involve children or adults who are the ages her children will become. Wait until her children are a little older and infidelity raises it's ugly head...
ML February 21, 2013 at 03:50 PM
yeah, I can't imagine anyone becoming "unnerved" at 20 helpless six-year olds being gunned down as they huddled together, screaming in terror. This place is a cesspool.
Devilsfan February 21, 2013 at 04:09 PM
Yeah because a divorced mother wanted to be a friend to her mentally ill son instead of a mother and she allowed him access to her weapons. Real smart huh? So now to make Karen and her groupd feel better, while not even solving the problem with today's society as she has admitted, we law abiding citizens have to give up our rights so she can feel better? Aint happening without a fight!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »